• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

The Fender Super Bassman 300 thread

#563
Played my new Rick 4003 through the SB300 at a gig yesterday - magic sound, the amp was able to nail that classic Rickenbacker sound just through the vintage channel, didn't need the extra EQ of the overdrive side. Made me want to grab a pick instead of using fingers and hammer **?! out of it. Brought a big smile to my face. I say again, I think the 6550s suit me far better than the 6L6s of the 100T. I know the SB300 is supposed to be just the same as the 100T only louder, but to me while I love the 100T the SB300 is a few steps above the 100T on every step of the scale.
 
#565
Hi Rod. I did not have time to play around with it and went with about 3-9-2 on the vintage channel for a basically flat sound. The new Ricks have a pull knob to switch in the capacitor for a brighter sound as the originals were, I tended to use it on the "modern" setting which is a tad bassier. I was using both pickups but the balance favours the bridge, what I especially noticed was the almost distorted Rick growl when I dug in. With the 100T the amp went into overdrive too early for me, which was a surprise as I did not think the Rick pickups were that hot. Here is a pic of the Ric - I had not planned on another bass, but this one was mint and popped up at a good price.
Here's the pic, some bass porn for ya:
 

Attachments

  • dscf0469.jpg
    dscf0469.jpg
    120.5 KB · Views: 129
  • dscf0473.jpg
    dscf0473.jpg
    117 KB · Views: 148
#574
yea i'm going to run mine through two Acoustic b115neo cabs in the meantime. seems like you can do so much tonally with this head, I really need to get into a practice with it to really figure it all out. What did you guys do to break in the tubes, anything? or did you just plug in and basically and not worry too much about it? Might run a graphic eq right before it also to give me some more options eq wise
 
#575
jeffgnr90 said:
yea i'm going to run mine through two Acoustic b115neo cabs in the meantime. seems like you can do so much tonally with this head, I really need to get into a practice with it to really figure it all out. What did you guys do to break in the tubes, anything? or did you just plug in and basically and not worry too much about it? Might run a graphic eq right before it also to give me some more options eq wise
Click to expand...

In my experience, tubes don't require break in. This amp has options for biasing to certain tonalities, so you might explore that.
 
#577
rodl2005 said:
I never heard of tubes needing breaking in. ..
As far as eq... I've never really needed any more than the 3 bass. Mid n treble. Especially with a sweepable mid eq. YMMV tho. :cool::thumbup:
Click to expand...

oh really? as subjective as this statement is, i honestly thought tubes that have seen wear n' tear "sounded better" than tubes that are untouched. then again I have had zero exp. when it comes to tube amps and i can only draw upon other peoples exp.

the eq on ch. 2 is very versatile, so any eq I use will be predominantly towards the ch. 1. Ch. 1 doesn't really suit the style of music i'm involved in currently i may use my sansamp for added distortion just for that particular channel. nothing's definite so i'll have to wait and see heh heh
 
#579
jeffgnr90 said:
oh really? as subjective as this statement is, i honestly thought tubes that have seen wear n' tear "sounded better" than tubes that are untouched. then again I have had zero exp. when it comes to tube amps and i can only draw upon other peoples exp.
Click to expand...


Worn out tubes is different from break in. Speakers require break in, so that the surround develops the optimum flexibility. Tubes are kind of like strings, objectively they are best when new (although they do require burn in, which is different, in that they should be run for 24-48 hours to allow them to settle in so they can be matched, but that should be done before they are purchased and once they are burned it, they don't change that much). You might like the sound of worn out tubes, that's totally legit, but it's not because they require a process similar to speakers. It might sound like burn in is the same as break in, but they are different parameters of the tube operation at play.
 
#580
edwinhurwitz said:
Worn out tubes is different from break in. Speakers require break in, so that the surround develops the optimum flexibility. Tubes are kind of like strings, objectively they are best when new (although they do require burn in, which is different, in that they should be run for 24-48 hours to allow them to settle in so they can be matched, but that should be done before they are purchased and once they are burned it, they don't change that much). You might like the sound of worn out tubes, that's totally legit, but it's not because they require a process similar to speakers. It might sound like burn in is the same as break in, but they are different parameters of the tube operation at play.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's what I was thinking of, the process before purchase. Good stuff to know!
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back